Planet-X it is so

ajk24

Have settled on the SL Pro-Carbon -FSA edition. Will be ordering tomorrow unless someone can provide a convincing arguement for something else

http://www.planet-x-warehouse.co.uk/acatalog/FSASpecialEdition.html

Aquos76

I too had decided to go with a planet x but am not so sure now, I have been told that they are really light weight and that they are prone to snapping especially in the large and extra large frames. I know of one chap who has seen two planet x frames snapping.

Has anyone else heard this about planet x frames

xz

hope mine doesn't snap, it's a size large, haven't heard that about them.

Ghost Rider

I took my new Planet-X SL Pro Carbon out yesterday for its first proper spin and, I have to say, it's a lovely machine. The frame is really stiff and responsive but it also absorbs a lot of the bumpiness of the road - especially compared to my aluminium-framed Ridley Triton S; it has a stiff frame too but it's pretty hard on the arse.

Interestingly (to me, at any rate) the noises the bikes make are very different: the Ridley makes a kind of metallic clatter going over bumps, whereas the Planet-X makes a duller, softer thud. It may seem odd to compare the bikes in sonic terms, but I think it reflects something about the quality of the ride. So, in the unlikely event that Planet-X ever ask me for a customer quote to put on their website, here it is:

"If the Planet-X SL Pro Carbon ever released an album, my arse would buy it."

The Ridley has three chainrings, with a lowest gear of 31/23, and once or twice yesterday I felt like I missed that on the Planet-X, the lowest gear of which is 34/25. But I suspect this was largely imaginary as those two gears aren't actually all that different in terms of ratio. So I was probably just making myself feel better about my fitness as I spluttered joylessly up Powerscourt Mountain...

ba

am i the only one who thinks the planet x frames are ugly and severely dated?

Ghost Rider

Yes.

Actually, I don't agree that they look dated but I do think P-X bikes are over-branded. That said, the plain carbon look of the SL Pro frame in black is, to my mind, a welcome antidote to the blaring colour schemes of some other brands, which seemed to have been designed for 14-year old boys.

ba wrote: »

am i the only one who thinks the planet x frames are ugly and severely dated?

TinyExplosions

ba wrote: »

am i the only one who thinks the planet x frames are ugly and severely dated?

Yes, it comes in pink for god's sake!

RobFowl

ba wrote: »

am i the only one who thinks the planet x frames are ugly and severely dated?

Yes (esp in pink and powder blue!) but they are cheap ! and If Wayne Randal and John Tanner ride them then they couldn't be too bad quality

Lumen

ba wrote: »

am i the only one who thinks the planet x frames are ugly and severely dated?

IMO the headtube looks ugly in photos, but I saw Ken's in the flesh yesterday and it looked nice.

There are prettier bikes, but if there was the perfect bike out there (and it was cheap) we'd all be riding the same thing, and that would be boring.

DirkVoodoo

Ok, so they are not as shapely as a Trek Madone, but I think the planet-X frames look pretty nice.

FrankGrimes

I have a Planetx SL Carbon Pro in black and while it does lack the snazziness of some more colourful bikes, I do like its understated black/charcoal speckly finish and the worst I would call it would be bland, not ugly.

FrankGrimes

Out of interest, what are the main differences in the SL Carbon Pro FSA and Ultegra versions? Seems the FSA one is £200 dearer and lighter due to some more carbon parts?

ajk24 - what will you be using the bike for and have you weighed up the cost/benefit of the 2 versions? You may well have, just thought I'd mention it in case it leads to you deciding you won't notice much difference and might save £200.

Quigs Snr

The Planet X SL is light, fast and reliable by all accounts. Basically a copy of the old Giant TCR. Sure its not made up of fancy shapes like a new Madone or a Cervelo soloist etc... so if you are looking for a bike to pose on, its not the bike for you. If you are looking for a bike that you can ride on and race with then it will be right down your street. (I am not a PX fanboy by the way, I ride a Cervelo R3 SL and Trek 5500 - for reference I have a PX Stealth TT bike)

People have a phobia about these lesser known brands. Someone knows someone who broke 2 Planet X bikes ? 4 treks, referred to as the Ford Mondeo of bikes on these forums have been replaced under warranty in my club in the last 2 years. Thats 4. Out of about 10. Does it make trek a bad bike ? No, just ask Lance and Alberto, I recall those lads doing rather well on them. Regarding the PX bikes, well their sponsored semi pro team tends to do well on them, as do their international level triathletes and ironmen.

Bikes break, c'est la vie. If you go on the web looking for reviews you will find a bad review about literally every bike out there. Its a fact, that you can get a faulty machine, you can hit a pothole, you can crash, or mistreat a bike and it can fail. Most problems I see are due to fellas thinking they are bike mechanics and over torquing stems, headsets, seatpins, bottom brackets etc... PX is mail order, so its likely some people are doing their own maintenance. How many of them have a torque wrench, a proper one ? Come to think of it, how many bike shops have you see use a torque wrench in this country.

Ghost Rider

I'd say you're spot on there. I was very careful about buying a torque wrench so I wouldn't overtighten anything and f**k up the frame. It's an extra expense but well worth it in the long term.

Quigs Snr wrote: »

The Planet X SL is light, fast and reliable by all accounts. Basically a copy of the old Giant TCR. Sure its not made up of fancy shapes like a new Madone or a Cervelo soloist etc... so if you are looking for a bike to pose on, its not the bike for you. If you are looking for a bike that you can ride on and race with then it will be right down your street.

People have a phobia about these lesser known brands. Someone knows someone who broke 2 Planet X bikes ? 4 treks have been replaced under warranty in my club in the last 2 years. Thats 4. Out of about 10. Does it make trek a bad bike ? No, just ask Lance.

Bikes break, c'est la vie. If you go on the web looking for reviews you will find a bad review about literally every bike out there. Its a fact, that you can get a faulty machine, you can hit a pothole, you can crash, or mistreat a bike and it can fail. Most problems I see are due to fellas thinking they are bike mechanics and over torquing stems, headsets, seatpins, bottom brackets etc... PX is mail order, so its likely some people are doing their own maintenance. How many of them have a torque wrench, a proper one ? Come to think of it, how many bike shops have you see use a torque wrench in this country.

xz

FrankGrimes wrote: »

Out of interest, what are the main differences in the SL Carbon Pro FSA and Ultegra versions? Seems the FSA one is £200 dearer and lighter due to some more carbon parts?

ajk24 - what will you be using the bike for and have you weighed up the cost/benefit of the 2 versions? You may well have, just thought I'd mention it in case it leads to you deciding you won't notice much difference and might save £200.

I think it cos the fact that the cranks are FSA ( compact Mega exo), the rest is Dura Ace, well it is on mine anyway